General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWaPo editorial: The U.S. insurance model doesn’t work
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-lane-the-us-insurance-model-doesnt-work/2014/02/10/0cb7f8f4-9277-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.htmlNor did he risk a consistent attack on the cherished idea of earned benefits in general or as it applied to health care. Sometimes, as in a speech last September, Obama depicted health coverage as a right. Yet in his first address to Congress as president in 2009, he spoke of it mainly as a means of reducing costs. He balked at a public option. He opposed an individual mandate in his 2008 campaign, then enacted one as president.
So when the CBO confirmed that Obamacare would enable some people to cut back on their work effort and still qualify for health coverage, subsidized by the taxes of those who continue working, it had the feel of an unmasking.
The whole point of any universal-coverage plan is to break the link between work and insurance. But Obamacare was never clearly advertised in those terms, notwithstanding the administrations after-the-fact efforts to explain why the CBO report was no big deal.
Republicans were bound to pounce on the CBO report and many voters were bound to agree with them. Yet this is likely to prove at most a tactical victory for the GOP, and possibly a pyrrhic one. The earned-benefits approach does have advantages; quite often, in fact, as the successful bipartisan reforms that linked welfare to work during the Clinton administration show.
Linking health insurance to work, however, is a bad idea: Theres just no necessary connection between how much you work and your risk of needing care. Eventually, the United States must move from a categorical approach to health insurance to a more universal one, whether through Obamacare or some less-convoluted plan.
SamKnause
(13,114 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)likely to agree with the gop on the CBO's Report are republicans and people that don't understand why decoupling access to health insurance from employers is a really good thing for we the people and, in the short run, for the business bottom-line.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,406 posts)which would be annoying. In 2010, tea-baggers were talking a load of nonsense, but it fired up enough of the gullible Republican voters that they took Congress. They'll be looking to get the same voters to turn up in 2014 and keep the House, and, they'll hope, make some gains in the Senate.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)This is where the constantly critical wing of the left is working at cross purposes against Democrats ... whereas, the right will believes they will see 2010 numbers in 2014, there are those on the left, actively working (whether intentionally, not inadvertently, to depress voter enthusiasm among Democrats.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)day one, but too many Americans have a need to slow progress down, to do the wrong things as long as possible before taking even obviously needed action. We were not even allowed to discuss a public option during the ACA debate not even after electing a man who promised he'd never sign a bill without such an option.
TBF
(32,127 posts)have health care it can't be taken away. The next logical step is to move to single payer - and it should be combined into the Medicare or Champus programs (whatever Champus is called now! I had it years ago as my dad was disabled military).
These are basic needs for our people in this country: unemployment, social security, medical care. The more the republicans throw money at the rich and try to deplete these programs the more they will alienate people.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)or quit working 3 shit-jobs. The nerve.
"some people to cut back on their work effort and still qualify for health coverage, subsidized by the taxes of those who continue working, it had the feel of an unmasking..."
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)It's a slot machine of sorts or in other words ...it's gambling. They gamble you won't get sick and you gamble that they will pay out (without having to get a lawyer to force them).
TheMathieu
(456 posts)And I will rally behind any Dem in 2016 that supports it.
JEB
(4,748 posts)They add nothing and take their percentage. Protection racket at best.